Veterans to Farmers

Legal name: Veterans to Farmers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454499443
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2023
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Yampa, CO, US
Phone
3033968681
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$241,926
Expenses
$246,098
Assets
$203,309
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richard Murphy (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Taylor Drew (Education Director): $70,000 total reported compensation
  • Richard Murphy (Executive Director): $24,320 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of Veterans to Farmers is to train veterans in agricultural systems, technologies and business operations for a fulfilling and sustainable lifestyle.

What it reported doing in 2023

Education Trained 18 Veterans in Market Farming and Hydroponics. Mentorship Mentored over 40 veterans with 1-on-1 support to help them further careers and businesses in agriculture and related fields as well as seek treatment and help for emotional and physical traumas that they are dealing with post-service. Outreach With thousands of veteran contracts in 2023 we continue to engage veterans and educate civilians on the benefit of a strong veterans community working together.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 26
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.5%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.7%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 96.5% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $233K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.